Touchy subject- (undesired) Association with "Furry" fetish

im gonna have to agree you you on the first paragraph i quoted here! humans are humans cats are cats. if you identify with a characteristic of an animal it may just be something that all animals share because humans are animals too.

you seem to be passionate about this topic and that is your right (and the nature of this thread)

to be honest the whole furry fetish makes me kinda queazy. to close to bestiality for my tastes.

so to bring this back to the topics of bjds.
i own a Soom MD Appini and i dont really consider her to be a furry because IMO for it to be a furry it has to have a anthromorphic face. because at least from what i have seen in the whole "furry" community they seem to all have animal like faces. cat ears and a tail i think are different than like a cat face.

and yes i wold be mad if someone said that my doll was a furry. because i dont really want to be identified with that community.

 

I agree with dev-nyo that for some reason a cat girl with a human face doesn't come across to me as a "furry", but a character with an animalistic face does. A human face with cat ears (or horns, or antlers, w/e) on top of the head comes across as something more familiar, like a person wearing a headband. I guess it's because I feel like I can still visually identify with the character. A full on animal face on the other hand is something more alien to me.

When it comes to the dolls, I don't mind a childish OR a mature doll with animal ears/horns/tails/paws/hooves as long as the face is still human. Dolls like that seem like a person in a costume, OR a mostly humanoid being that is maybe a demon or a spirit of some kind. I prefer them to remain decently clothed though. Pretty much any doll, wether it's an animal or not, getting all hot and heavy is something I personally dislike. I suppose a doll with a mature body and animal face wouldn't bother me as long as it wasn't portrayed sexually, but if it was then it would be extra disturbing.

Has anyone ever accused you of liking or participating in Furry fetishism for having Anthro type dolls?
The closest thing I have to an anthro doll is a girl themed after the constellation Aries. She already has horns, and I plan to maybe get her some hooves in the future, but so far everyone has immediately seen the connection to Aries and not just a goat.

How do you respond to that kind of assumption if it comes up?
I would be offended, because even though there are many shades of gray, the furry community is not something that is positively looked upon, and not something I want to be associated with.

Do you think that kind of assumption is more likely if anthro dolls were sculpted or dressed more maturely?
Yes, I do. I believe that dolls of just about any scuplt and type can be accessorized in a way that would make them interesting AND appropriate for the general public, but unfortunately I have not seen the majority of anthro dolls presented in this way.

As always, my opinions are all based on my personal experiences with this hobby.

Here's a thought: What about all the Na'vi dolls? Do you consider those furries? I suppose I didn't associate them with furries because the movie they are featured in presents them as something a human can empathize with, but as I've been thinking about it, they kind of blur the line.

 

Has anyone ever accused you of liking or participating in Furry fetishism for having Anthro type dolls?
N/A - I've not finished my doll customs which will make her a "unicorn girl". I don't plan on taking her out in public circles so I doubt an incident like this will happen.

How do I respond: I might immediately get defensive if asked. So as soon as it's asked it'd be clear that no...I don't consider myself a furry. But I do love ponies.

Do you think that kind of assumption is more likely if anthro dolls were sculpted or dressed more maturely?
Hardly even a fair question. An overtly sexualized sculpt/outfit on a doll upsets a lot of people because I think culturally, dolls are for girls when they are children. Therefore there is something "innocent" about the concept of dolls as toys. Even fashion dolls which can get away this for some reason.

Adding an animal head to that just adds insult to injury in the case of sexing up what was considered innocent. (i.e. Anthro Animals are used as a child concept as well. Beatrix Potter and the various cartoons mentioned. Er...even Teddy Bears.)

So, sexualizing any sculpt of doll can increase the negative connotations of various fettishes or groups.

 

I just wanted to comment that being accused of having a fetish for furries would probably come up a lot if you had something like Iplehouse's Luna Tamer fullset, which has a cat face and is decked out in leather bondage-looking stuff.....
Just my input, hah...

 

It seems like every furry here is saying, "Well, a lot of people like the yiffy stuff but I don't!" and trying to bolster the idea that non-sexual furries are the norm but honestly? You go anywhere that furries congregate - website, art hosts, conventions, games, etc - and the first thing you will see is all sorts of sexual conversation, images, roleplays, etc. To us 'mundanes', as someone labelled us earlier in the thread, it's impossible to find any reason to dig under the surface to find the 'innocent' furries since around every corner is some artist who wants to shove poorly done art of their super original hermaphrodite sex-hungry wolf man in your face, with an inconsiderate, selfish, immature attitude to boot. How encouraging is that to someone that is genuinely interested in exploring the furry fandom? I certainly won't deny that there are good furry artists out there, who have a good technique and sound grasp on anatomy and composition. But when most of them start drawing and posting erotic art because it's what the fandom wants and what people pay most for, I'm not interested in their work at all.

Personally, I do not like the furry fandom, and I have difficulty taking those who claim to be otherkin seriously. The attitudes of the most prevalent figures in the genres are disgusting to me, and there is nothing aesthetically pleasing to me when looking at art of someone's sparkledog on two legs or hearing about your oh-so-special connection with chinchillas and how you think you are one.

Regarding furry fandom in the BJD hobby: I feel there is a very significant difference between small, stylized anthro dolls (Pipos), animal elements slapped on a human (Soom), and mature-figured anthro dolls (Volks Baron). The first two, to me, are alright. The small ones remind me more of cartoon type creatures - I would be slow to call Mickey Mouse, Hello Kitty, Peter Cottontail, and many other childhood figures anthro although that is essentially what they are. These dolls are nearly impossible to sexualize. The dolls with animal parts, like Soom's infamous monthly dolls, also don't terribly bother me in their default states. The base of the doll - most of the body, the face - is human, and the animal parts are just sort of slapped on afterwards. This type of character doesn't bother me. Of course there are people who take those dolls a step up and then I go "blargh, furry", but in general I don't mind these dolls.

Full blown anthro dolls are what get me. Doesn't matter how well done your doll is, if I have to look at a cat with tits I get grossed out. Fortunately for me these dolls are few and far between and I don't encounter them except for when they show up in an unrelated thread or search.

To answer the specific questions? I have no anthro doll, at most I've slapped cat ears on a regular BJD. I don't usually share my dolls with anyone more than my Flickr, best friend, and boyfriend, so there isn't much room for people to think up ways to make false accusations. If someone did try to? Big freaking whoop. I know who I am and what I like, and furry fandom isn't involved with either of those. Do I think an animal head on a sexy human body is a furry doll? Yes. Do I think that doll collector is a furry? If they have several furry dolls or brag about their 'enlightened lifestyle' are furries are wont to do, yes.

 

I agree with nanlady on all points, and though I want some of the cute pipos anthro dolls I don't think anyone would mistake me for a furry any more than they would someone who has a Hello Kitty shirt.

 

Nope. No reason to. I just don't understand how you get from having an anthro doll to 'being accused of furry fetishism'? I guess a good rhetorical question is 'what was someone doing with the doll to be asked that question?' (<-- joke) Just having an anthro doll or liking the art really isn't that big a deal- a lot of people do and a lot of it is mainstream, not related to any sexual acts whatsoever.

That question/accusation seems like a pretty big jump to me and doesn't make a whole lot of sense unless someone is trying to antagonize another person with a topic that they feel negatively about.

For the record: there's a lot of stuff out there in this world and, personally, the fursuit kids seem pretty harmless to me. Additionally, BJDs in general get that 'fetishism' question quite a bit- anthro or not.

No one has actually "accused" me of anything like that. It's likely because they are in my home when they see the dolls and know I am an artist. I think that allows them a 'mental scapegoat' as to why I am interested in dolls in general.

Futhermore, no one can deny that they are beautiful pieces of art. Then it's pretty much 'discussion over'.

Sure? But, you know, people pretty much sexualize anything and that has little to nothing to do with your own preferences- you can't be responsible for where someone else's mind goes. Thinking about that sort of thing may make you crazy. ^^

I think your questions are difficult to answer because it seems as though you are trying to predict the responses - the assumptions even, which is even more abstract- of 'everyone' to an anthro doll. There's really no good way to do that. Ultimately, it just depends on an individual basis what people are going to take away from the very personal and creative expression that is 'the doll'.

 

Has anyone ever accused you of liking or participating in Furry fetishism for having Anthro type dolls? Kind of, but differently. -I- haven't been accused of such, but some of my human DOLLS have been accused of having a furry fetish and/or bestiality fetish because they have previously been paired with fantasy dolls. Which kind of does bother me, since that's not at all what I was going for, and all of the fantasy characters have been humanoid, not pure animal. (like werecats, werefox, demons, etc) I've since made sure not to pair my humans with animal fantasy characters because of it. It didn't bother me until somebody pointed it out. Now, there's an ick factor. Which is odd, since it doesn't bother me if other people do this with their dolls, yet it does with my own...

How do you respond to that kind of assumption if it comes up? If I get accused of the furry thing, I just simply state that's not the case. If my dolls get accused, I still state it was not the case, but agree it does kind of bother me and going forward won't be happening again. lol

Do you think that kind of assumption is more likely if anthro dolls were sculpted or dressed more maturely? I don't really know, actually. There are plenty of other mature animal dolls out there. Monster High has werewolves and a bee girl, Bratz and Barbie have both worn cat suits with tails and ears, Barbie made a Wizard of Oz lion Ken with lion features, just to name a few, and I don't think anybody assumes MH, Bratz or Barbie collectors are furries, even with humans dolls dressed in fur suits! Not really sure why a bjd should be any different.

 

Has anyone ever accused you of liking or participating in Furry fetishism for having Anthro type dolls?
Since I currently do not have any anthro or animal-styled dolls I can't accurately answer this question. I fully intend to pick up a few once my budget allows, and I fully anticipate having this sort of situation arise. Whether it actually happens is another story entirely, but I am prepared for it.

How do you respond to that kind of assumption if it comes up?
There's that whole saying "When you assume you make an ass out of u and me." It's usually a safe go to for those sorts of situations. Were I not someone of a "furry persuasion" my answer would probably be a mildly surprised "No," and then move on with whatever the conversation happened to be.

I do consider myself a part of the Furry Fandom (I've chosen to use Fandom instead of Fetish, but don't worry yourself too much with semantics) and am usually pretty casual when these sorts of things come up. My answers vary from "Yes, and?" to "That's personal and I don't feel comfortable discussing it." In my experience the best way to deal with awkward situations is to make as little fuss as possible, and move on. My fandom is an aspect of me, but not a definition, if that makes any sort of weird sense at all.

Do you think that kind of assumption is more likely if anthro dolls were sculpted or dressed more maturely?
Hm, yes and no. The misconceptions about what is and is not considered "furry" (and there are many of them) are always going to be there no matter what you do or do not do. Assumptions are going to be made about the person who owns any doll that's dressed in a very particular way. I would certainly raise an eyebrow at someone who showed up to a meet or con with a doll in nothing but lingerie, for example. But that's their choice. I can't tell someone how they can or can't play with their toys.

 

Alright so first off woah what's with all the hate for furries/otherkin on this topic? I know they're not popular sects or anything, but people flat out saying they're crazy for having a spiritual belief is kind of crossing a rude line. Not wanting to be associated with furry fetish things doesn't make it cool to go on a furry smear campaign.

That said, no, it's not cool that the first assumption if you own an anthro doll might be that you're into yiff. Just like it's pretty uncool feeling that if you have two dolls you MUST be into shipping them, or that if you have immature dolls that you must be into shotacon or something like that. Or the rather infamous if you have a male doll it simply must be gay thing that seems to happen on these forums. Nobody wants to get shoved into assumptions about their sexuality that they don't want.

 

Ummm... First some general thoughts on the nature of accusations of having such a fetish:

1) the dolls themselves are NOT FURRY, hence a real "Furry" fetishist would not have much fun with such a doll, wouldn't they?

2) there is more than the Furry type of "Anthro" dolls out there (plant anthro dolls, cyborgs/robots, fantasy creatures with more humanesque than animal features etc)

3) then, there are fetishes there that the "Anthro" dolls can be associated with in a much more fitting way - what about object sexualization (unliving objects), or being an Exophile (generally liking anything that is more than just human), or even the good old BDSM pet-play, and then the "sexdoll".-assumption (yeah, I heard that one pretty often *rolleyes*)

4) last but not least, I think most people are aware of the fact that the animal-human mixture has been around for some thousands of years, and actually had a "sacred", or religious character for some time (look at most ancient religions), and nothing fetishistic... Hence, most people do not see a solely fetishistic nature in animal-shaped doll parts. So such accusations are usually coming from... trolls. And they don't really think about their words. They don't need reasons to say things to you.

And now to answer the questions:


Has anyone ever accused you of liking or participating in Furry fetishism for having Anthro type dolls?

No.
How do you respond to that kind of assumption if it comes up?

It didn't yet. If it ever will, and I have the impression that the one assuming it is not doing it for trolling (an example of a serious assumption would from someone who has a Furry fetish themselves), I will probably truthfully explain that I like Anthro dolls due to other reasons (which doesn't mean I condemn the Furries - I have nothing against them). And if it is just a troll... Well. Just make fun of them or something.

Do you think that kind of assumption is more likely if anthro dolls were sculpted or dressed more maturely?

No, I don't think so. Most Anthro dolls, mature or not, have no fur... So I think only the fact that a doll would have hair glued all over the body (and I mean everywhere, not random beards or pubic hair), or at least wearing a fur-suit, would really make the assumption more likely. Otherwise, most of these "assumptions" are just basic trolling, like I already stated, in my opinion, and lack serious thought and background.

 

Has anyone ever accused you of liking or participating in Furry fetishism for having Anthro type dolls?
No, and I would think it absurd if someone would suggest/imply such a thing. Liking/owning/wanting anthros in no way shape or form implies that the person is into the "furry" fetish/lifestyle/fandom/community/etc.

How do you respond to that kind of assumption if it comes up?
Honestly, I don't know how I would respond. Of course, I'd say "no, these dolls have no relation to the furry fandom", but as far as anymore than this, it will depend on who makes the assumption. If it's a family member or a good friend, I'd have a discussion as to why the thought even entered their mind - they should know me well enough to know that I have no interest in furry. If it's an acquaintance, I'd probably just leave it at that.

Do you think that kind of assumption is more likely if anthro dolls were sculpted or dressed more maturely?
I think that these assumptions are more likely if the person who makes them doesn't know the anthro-owning individual well enough. Chances are that if an individual is into the furry fandom, there will be much more clear signs than simply owning a fantasy resin doll.

I own quite a number of anthros. To me, they are simply very cute dolls. I particularly enjoy cat anthros because they remind me of my own cat, who I consider incredibly cute and adorable. The anthros are no different than any other doll in my collection - they are cute and I enjoy having them around.

 

&#8203;Hahaha...I'm surprised I haven't stumbled across this thread sooner. As an anthro lover I always laugh at the ignorance of people who jump to the conclusion that you are a furry simply because you own anthro dolls. I say this as someone who has absolutely nothing against Furries / Otherkin but someone who instead always laughs at the ignorance of those who reject something before they even try to understand it ...the worst kind of ignorance in my mind. Heck, anyone in this hobby has or will at some time face that kind of ignorance simply by the fact that we like and own dolls to begin with. The human need to clump and categorise people into certain groups like this is just part of this ignorance.

Has anyone ever accused you of liking or participating in Furry fetishism for having Anthro type dolls?

Not as of yet but I have seen this assumption come up on other forums and in other places time and again. As someone who has loved and grown up with animals, animal characters in stories such as Black Beauty, Charlotte's web, the All Creatures Great and Small books, The entire Narnia book series and has loved anthropomorphic characters in games and animation since childhood and cheers for the return of these types of characters such as in the new 2011 redo of the Thundercats series for me this love stems from a very innocent place so I laugh at the assumption.

How do you respond to that kind of assumption if it comes up?

As I've said before, I laugh. Hate and ignorance at the choices and views of others before you've even tried to understand them is simply ridiculous and I say that as much in defence of those who are furries as I do for those who aren't! Ignorance is everywhere so it is far better to laugh at it than to waste your time and energy getting offended by it.

Do you think that kind of assumption is more likely if anthro dolls were sculpted or dressed more maturely?

I can see why the assumption may come up with regards to the more mature figures as opposed to the larger majority of asexual not so anatomically correct tiny anthros but, again, the assumption is based more on ignorance and fear than anything else so is still laughable.

 

That's like accusing someone of being a pervert for watching The Lion King.

And that pretty much sums up my reaction/response.

 

Amusingly enough, my DD Usako has been modded into my furry persona and I still haven't had anyone accuse me of being a furry.

I wouldn't be offended if someone put two and two together about Usako. I'm rarely offended by negative comments from people who don't know what they're talking about. It's not worth the effort to be offended.

Being that Usako is an anthro with a mature body, I think it speaks for it's self about your last question.

 

Well, if I did have an anthro doll and someone accused me of being a furry, I'd laugh. People are way too quick to make such bold assumptions... I've already been accused of being a furry because of an anthropomorphic species I made up in college, so...

I'm fairly sure how the doll is dressed may not matter... some people have such a narrow thought process that they will think Anthro-animal doll=furry.

 

This is really like saying;
Does it offend you when people call you a skater because your doll has a skateboard?
Does it offend you when people call you an emo cause your doll is dressed a colorful way?
Does it offend you when people think you are gay cause your doll is gay?

Who cares?

People are people, cliques are cliques. And honestly, furries are pretty cool people. All my friends have a fursona, and really, I've never had them go shoving yiff in my face, or asking me "Do you want to yiff my rabbit boy? :B"

They use their "fursonas" in a very similar way we use our dolls, as a form of artistic, and self expression. So I really don't see the bad in it....

Sorry.

 

Like most here - I'd laugh. I think anthro-dolls are cool but they remind me of toys I had as a small child and so I never really entertained they could have a sexual appeal until reading this thread. I wouldn't like to think a bestiality-fetish is that common with Doll peeps.

I think adult humans wearing neko-ears is cute and sexy though, so human dolls wearing neko-ears would probably hold wider sexual appeal than anthro-dolls to those people who project sexual desire on inanimate objects.

 

In those cases, it's really better to just ignore the person if you don't have a 'furry' view towards your doll in the first place. Why shouldn't anthro dolls be normal characters just like the human ones? Fetishes are often ingrained into us as the sort of taboo that kills everything around it unless you subscribe to it, but I'm of the opinion that as long as you have a firm grasp of your character, it can never be tainted by association or social stigma. I mean, you have to set people straight occasionally, but there's no need to panic if you get the odd furry comment now and then, it's mostly just ignorance, not malice.